CAR_Public/030724.mbx            C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R
  
            Thursday, July 24, 2003, Vol. 5, No. 145

                        Headlines                            

BREAST IMPLANTS: FDA Urged To Consider Carefully Lifting Ban
CREDIT CARDS: 8 Million Notices Sent Out in Landmark Settlement
DOW CHEMICAL: Court To Rule on Certification For Residents' Suit
FAX.COM: CA Attorney General Files Civil Suit For Unwanted Faxes
FLORIDA: 18 Charged With Prescription Drug Racketeering, Fraud

GREEN TREE: Agrees To Settle MN Securities Lawsuit For $12.5M
HOME DEPOT: FL Court Refuses to Certify CCA-Treated Wood Lawsuit
I2 TECHNOLOGIES: Investors Commence Securities Suits in N.D. TX
I2 TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Shareholder Derivative Suits in N.D. TX
I2 TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit in N.D. TX

I2 TECHNOLOGIES: Plaintiffs Appeal Dismissal of Derivative Suit
IDAHO: Agriculture Director Says No Alternative to Field-Burning
L90 INC.: Agrees To Settle For $5M Securities Lawsuit in C.D. CA
L90 INC.: Plaintiffs Ask CA Court To Allow Appeal of Dismissal
L90 INC.: Reaches Settlement For CA Shareholder Derivative Suits

SILICON LABORATORIES: Plaintiffs Push MOU To Settle Stock Suits
SUNOCO INC.: Judge Grants Certification To Civil Rights Lawsuit
TRILLIUM BANQUET: Faces Suit For Students Infected With E. Coli
UNITED STATES: CA Group Speaks Out Against Class Action Abuse
UTAH: Legislature Cuts Foster-Care Review Board's Budget In Half

WOODWARD GOVERNOR: Employees File Race Discrimination Suit in IL

                  New Securities Fraud Cases


ADMINISTAFF INC.: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. TX
CENTRAL PARKING: Marc Henzel Files Securities Lawsuit in M.D. TN
CROMPTON CORPORATION: Brodsky & Smith Lodges CA Securities Suit
CROMPTON CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in CA
CROMPTON CORPORATION: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in CA

GUIDANT CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Suit in IN
LABORATORY CORPORATION: Charles Piven Files Stock Lawsuit in NC
READ-RITE CORPORATION: Wechsler Harwood Files CA Securities Suit
SINGING MACHINE: Vianale & Vianale Lodges Securities Suit in FL
STOCKWALK INC.: Zimmerman Reed Launches Securities Lawsuit in MN

                          *********

BREAST IMPLANTS: FDA Urged To Consider Carefully Lifting Ban
------------------------------------------------------------
Consumer groups are asking the United States Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) to follow stringent standards while
considering whether to lift its ban on the sale of silicone-gel
filled breast implants, the Associated Press reports.

The FDA is considering implant manufacturer Inamed Corporation's
request to let it sell its version of silicone implants.  The
FDA will likely seek recommendations from its scientific
advisers before deciding, but has said its primary consideration
will be how well women fared in the two years after getting
silicone implants.

In the 1990s, thousands of women alleged that the implants gave
them serious diseases, such as arthritis and cancer.  In 1992,
the FDA banned silicone implants.  The agency however allowed
the sale of saline-filled implants, as long as women were warned
that they were prone to leaking and deflating, requiring more
surgery.  

In 1999, however, the influential Institute of Medicine revealed
that silicone implants don't cause major diseases, although they
break relatively often.  Further research showed that silicone
implants begin leaking about seven years after they receive
them.

"The FDA is simply not looking at enough information to
reasonably assure women that silicone gel breast implants are
safe in the body over many years," NOW President Kim Gandy, who
urged the agency to require years of additional data told AP.  
Dr. Celia Witten, FDA's chief of implanted devices, responded
that the agency always considers whatever long-term safety data
are available before deciding a product's fate.


CREDIT CARDS: 8 Million Notices Sent Out in Landmark Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
More than 8 million notices have been sent out to participants
in the historic and landmark settlement of an antitrust case
against Visa U.S.A. Inc. and MasterCard International, Inc.

More than six years ago, in October of 1996, the merchants filed
suit against MasterCard and Visa because they were attempting to
monopolize the debit card market just as they have monopolized
the credit card market.  The merchants also challenged Visa and
MasterCard's enforcement of their "Honor All Cards" tying rule,
which illegally forced merchants who accept their credit cards
also to accept their slow, fraud-prone, excessively priced and
deceptively designed debit cards.  

The case was certified as a class action in February of 2000,
and the trial was set to commence on April 28, 2003, following
the defendants' unsuccessful appeals of the class certification
decision and supplementation of summary judgment motions.

On the eve of trial, the parties agreed to the settlements.  
Final settlement agreements were signed on June 4, 2003 and the
federal judge overseeing the case, Judge John Gleeson, granted
preliminary approval to the settlements and the notice plan on
June 13, 2003.  Any objections to the terms of the settlements
and plan of allocation are due to be filed by September 5, 2003,
and a fairness hearing will take place on September 25, 2003, in
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York before
Judge John Gleeson.

Under the settlements, Visa is set to pay $2.025 billion to
merchants over the next 10 years and MasterCard is set to pay
$1.025 billion over the same period.  By December 22, 2003, Visa
and MasterCard must pay $350 million to the settlement fund and
then pay $300 million every year for the next nine years.

According to the American Bar Association, the $3.05 billion
total settlement is the largest ever in an antitrust case.  
Lloyd Constantine, a principle in the New York firm Constantine
& Partners, the lead counsel for the merchants, says "The
changes in Visa and MasterCard's business practices, beginning
August 1, will bring even larger economic benefits for merchants
as offline debit interchange fees drop.  In the long run, this
settlement offers more choice and more competitive pricing for
merchants and consumers."

The agreements also state that Visa and MasterCard will lower
fees on offline signature debit card transactions beginning
August 1, 2003, saving merchants as much as $1 billion for the
remainder of this year.  As of January 1, 2004, merchants will
no longer be forced to comply with the credit card associations'
tying arrangements that required them to accept all Visa and
MasterCard debit card products if they accepted the
associations' credit cards.

"This settlement will expand consumers' payment choices.  For
more than a decade Visa, MasterCard and their member/owner banks
have suppressed the faster, safer and less expensive online PIN
debit transactions," Mr. Constantine said.  "Once the terms of
the settlements have been fully approved and implemented,
consumers will be able to freely choose the way they pay without
economic coercion, which Visa and MasterCard have used against
consumers and merchants."

While the terms of the settlements call for payments over ten
years, both Visa and MasterCard have agreed to cooperate in an
effort to secure financing to allow all payments to be made to
merchants over the next year.  "This process would save a
significant amount in administrative costs, upwards of $100
million, so we expect that the total of the payments that
merchants would receive over the next year would be worth
significantly more than the total they would have received in 10
checks over nine years," said Mr. Constantine.

"The payout to merchants will be easy, fair, and equitable.  The
payment amount will be based on a merchant's volume of debit and
credit card transactions between October 25, 1992 and July 31,
2003, the day before the new off-line debit pricing is to go
into effect," Mr. Constantine continued.

Visa and MasterCard have agreed to make their transaction
database available so that notice and the allocation of payments
to merchants will be completed quickly, cost effectively, and
accurately.  "In effect, this will mean most merchants will be
able to receive a claim with minimal paperwork, and need to do
nothing until they receive a claim form in the mail after final
approval," Mr. Constantine said.  "If a merchant questions the
payment they will be able to complete a more detailed form to
ensure that they receive the proper payment."

The certified class consists of all persons and business
entities that have accepted Visa and/or MasterCard credit cards
and therefore have been required to accept Visa and/or
MasterCard offline signature debit transactions from October 25,
1992 to the present.

Members of the class were given notice of pendency and an
opportunity to opt-out of the case in September, October and
November of 2002. New Merchants -- i.e., those who first began
accepting Visa and/or MasterCard credit and debit cards for
payment after June 21, 2002 -- have the right to exclude
themselves from the class by filing a request for exclusion by
September 5, 2003.  All class members have the right to object
to the settlements by September 5, 2003 and to appear at the
fairness hearing on September 25, 2003.

For more details, contact The Garden City Group, Inc. by Mail:
PO Box 9000-6014, Merrick, NY 11566.; attn. In Re Visa
Check/MasterMoney Antitrust Litigation by Phone: 1-888-641-4437
or by E-mail: admin@InReVisaCheck-
MasterMoneyAntitrustLitigation.com


DOW CHEMICAL: Court To Rule on Certification For Residents' Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Saginaw County Circuit Court in Michigan will consider the
dismissal of a lawsuit demanding that Dow Chemical Co. pay for
medical tests, over dioxins that allegedly contaminated the
land, the Bay City Times reports.

Michigan residents filed a suit in March alleging that dioxin
has led to declining property values and threatened their
health.  The Company allegedly polluted their homes and back
yards.  State officials also labeled the floodplain as a
"hazardous waste facility" because of its dioxin contamination.  
The suit seeks payments for lost property value, diagnostic
medical testing, punitive damages and a trust fund that would
pay for medical care and dioxin research.

Dow officials have called the suit baseless, the Bay City Times
reports.  The company submitted a response saying there is no
proof that excessive dioxin levels exist in the plaintiffs'
yards or caused health problems.

Company attorneys argued no legal precedent exists that would
force Dow to cover the expense of testing.  "There is law in the
state of Michigan. Plaintiffs are asking you to go beyond it,"
Doug Kurtenbach, Dow's Chicago-based attorney, argued, according
to a Times report.  "You should not."

Jan P. Helder, attorney for 225 property owners in the
Tittabawassee River floodplain who have sued Dow, accused
company officials of trying to minimize health concerns.  "They
know better.  They know dioxin is a highly dangerous substance,"
Mr. Helder said.  "They are trying to use the law as something
they can hide behind."


FAX.COM: CA Attorney General Files Civil Suit For Unwanted Faxes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fax broadcaster Fax.com faces a federal civil complaint filed by
California Attorney General William Lockyer, charging the
company with junk-fax violations and seeking millions in
penalties and damages, DMNews reports.

The suit charges the Company with violating state law and the
federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) by sending
unsolicited commercial faxes and pre-recorded phone messages.  
The Company allegedly committed violations of unfair competition
and misleading advertising laws.

The suit is the latest among several state complaints filed
against the Company.  The largest civil suit came from Silicon
Valley entrepreneur Steve Kirsch, co-founder of the Infoseek
Internet search engine and current president of Propel software.  

In August 2002, Mr. Kirsch filed a $2.2 trillion lawsuit against
Fax.com.  Mr. Kirsch's case and all other fax cases in state
court in California are on hold pending a state court of appeals
decision regarding the right for private citizens to sue under
the TCPA.  An Orange County, CA, judge recently dismissed a
consumer class-action case against Fax.com after agreeing with
the company's contention that the state must pass a law "opting
in" to the federal statute before consumers can sue, DMNews.com
reports.  

Fax.com representatives did not respond to a call for comment
yesterday, DMNews.com reports.


FLORIDA: 18 Charged With Prescription Drug Racketeering, Fraud
--------------------------------------------------------------
Florida Attorney General Charlie Crist and Statewide Prosecutor
Peter Williams today announced the indictment of nineteen
individuals by the Seventeenth Statewide Grand Jury for crimes
associated with adulterated prescription drugs.

"These individuals have participated in some of the most heinous
acts possible," said Atty. General Crist.  "Our most ill
citizens - cancer and AIDS patients - depend on these drugs for
their very lives."

The Grand Jury issued two indictments last Thursday, following
an investigation that began in January 2002 involving the
teamwork of the Attorney General's Office of Statewide
Prosecution, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, the
Broward County State Attorney's Office, the Miami-Dade Police
Department and the Florida Department of Health.

The first indictment charges Michael Carlow and 17 co-
conspirators with various crimes associated with selling to the
wholesale market adulterated, relabeled, stolen, illegally
imported and improperly stored prescription drugs.  The charges
vary by individual and include:

     (1) racketeering,

     (2) conspiracy to commit racketeering,

     (3) organized scheme to defraud,

     (4) grand theft,

     (5) sale or delivery of a controlled substance,

     (6) possession with intent to sell prescription drugs,

     (7) purchase or receipt of a prescription drug from
         unauthorized person

Prescription drugs used in these activities include:

     (i) Neupogen - used for cancer and HIV patients;

    (ii) Gammagard (Gamimune, Iveegam and Panglobulin) - used
         for HIV patients;

   (iii) Epogen (Procrit) - used for cancer and AIDS patients;  
         and

    (iv) Lipitor - used to lower blood cholesterol

Others indicted in these activities are Candace Carlow, Thomas
Atkins Jr., Marilyn Atkins, Henry Garcia, Fabian Diaz, Joel De
La Osa, David Ebanks, Jose L. Benitez, Dariel Tabares, Michael
Burman, Lazaro Vilarchao, Ivan Vilarchao, Joseph Villanueva,
Arturo Godinez, Tom Martino, Julio Cesar Cruz and Gisela
Gonzalez.

The second indictment charges Jose Grillo with one count of an
unauthorized scheme to defraud and 18 felony counts involving
the unauthorized receipt or sale of prescription drugs.  Mr.
Grillo allegedly relabeled the drug Epogen (Procrit), used to
treat seriously ill cancer and AIDS patients, to indicate
strength 20 times stronger and thereby selling it for a higher
price.

Penalties these individuals will face range from 5 to 30 years
in prison for each count.  The ill-gotten gains from their
activities are estimated to be in the tens of millions of
dollars.  Prosecution of those charged will be handled by the
Attorney General's Office of Statewide Prosecutor.

Joining Mr. Crist and Mr. Williams at a news conference in Ft.
Lauderdale were Daryl McLaughlin, Interim Commissioner of FDLE,
and Dr. John O. Agwunobi, Secretary of the Department of Health.

"This group has been diverting critical and costly prescription
medications that are critical to the health of individuals
suffering from serious illnesses," said Mr. McLaughlin.  "This
case could not have moved forward without the dedicated teamwork
by all agencies involved."

"I would like to personally thank Governor Jeb Bush for his
commitment to ensuring Florida's residents and visitors are
receiving safe, unadulterated prescription drugs," said Dr.
Agwunobi.

Atty. General Crist also announced that future penalties for
these crimes will be more severe thanks to the Florida
Legislature's passage of new legislation, which Governor Bush
signed into law.  For crimes of this nature that occur after
July 1, 2003, the penalty can be up to life in prison.

"With the recent legislation he signed into law, Florida now has
the toughest and clearest prescription drug regulation of any
state in the nation," said Dr. Agwunobi.


GREEN TREE: Agrees To Settle MN Securities Lawsuit For $12.5M
-------------------------------------------------------------
Green Tree Financial Corporation reached a preliminary $12.5
million settlement of a securities class action filed in the
United States District Court in Minnesota, charging the Company
and some former officials by conspiring to artificially inflate
the Company's stock and to boost the former CEO's compensation
in 1996, the Pioneer Press reports.

Several suits were filed since 1997, charging the Company with
exaggerated earnings for 1996 and the first nine months of 1997,
allowing former chief executive Larry Coss to reap a $102
million bonus - mostly stock - in 1996.  Mr. Coss left the
company in 1998 when insurance company Conseco Inc. bought Green
Tree, changing its name to Conseco Finance Corporation.  The
suit further charged the Company with engaging in used
questionable accounting practices, changing its prepayment
assumptions internally without disclosing those to the public.

The Company issued a surprise notice in November 1997 that they
would take a $125 million to $150 million charge because
customers were prepaying mobile home loans faster than expected
as interest rates fell.  Investors saw their stock value reduced
in half.

The consumer lender and its former officials did not admit to or
deny any wrongdoing, according to documents filed last week in
US Bankruptcy Court in Chicago.  A July 28 hearing has been
scheduled for the bankruptcy court to approve the settlement,
the Pioneer Press reports.  The settlement covers investors who
bought Green Tree common stock or bought or sold Green Tree
common stock options between July 15, 1995, and January 27,
1998.


HOME DEPOT: FL Court Refuses to Certify CCA-Treated Wood Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States District Court for South Florida refused to
certify as a class action a lawsuit against Home Depot for
selling wood treated with chromated copper arsenate, the
Washington Times reports.

In February 2003, the suit was filed against several
manufacturers and retailers of CCA-treated wood.  During oral
arguments, however, plaintiffs admitted only a handful of
personal injuries have been filed over CCA-related incidents.  
The court later dismissed all defendants, except Home Depot.

In a strongly worded opinion, Judge Donald Middlebrooks said a
class action "would be futile."  Jim Hale, executive director of
the Wood Preservative Science Council, told the Washington Times
this decision is a severe blow to those who have been trying to
make CCA "the next asbestos, and to alarm the public to a threat
which simply does not exist."


I2 TECHNOLOGIES: Investors Commence Securities Suits in N.D. TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
I2 Technologies, Inc. and certain of its current and former
officers and directors face several securities class actions
filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Texas (Dallas Division).

The complaints bring claims under the federal securities laws,
specifically Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, relating to the Company's announcements that it
would re-audit certain of its consolidated financial statements
and that there would be material adjustments to its financial
statements.  Specifically, these actions allege that the Company
issued a series of false or misleading statements to the market
during the class period that failed to disclose that:

     (1) the Company had materially overstated its revenue by
         improperly recognizing revenue on certain customer
         contracts;

     (2) the Company lacked adequate internal controls and were
         therefore unable to ascertain its true financial
         condition; and

     (3) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial
         statements issued during the class period were
         materially false and misleading.

Plaintiffs contend that such statements caused the Company's
stock price to be artificially inflated.  The complaints seek
unspecified damages on behalf of a purported class of purchasers
of the Company's common stock during the period from April 18,
2000 to January 24, 2003.

Based on the stage of the litigation, it is not possible to
estimate the amount or range of possible loss that might result
from an adverse judgment or a settlement of this matter.


I2 TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Shareholder Derivative Suits in N.D. TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
I2 Technologies, Inc. and certain of its officers and directors
face two purported shareholder derivative filed in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas
Division).  The suits claim that certain of the Company's
officers and directors breached their fiduciary duties to the
company and its
stockholders by:

     (1) causing the company to improperly recognize revenue in
         violation of generally accepted accounting principles
         to artificially inflate the Company's stock price in
         order to complete acquisitions in which Company stock
         was used as consideration, and

     (2) selling shares of the company's common stock while in
         possession of material adverse non-public information
         regarding the Company's financial statements and
         securing personal loans using its allegedly
         artificially inflated stock price.

As stated, the complaints are derivative in nature and do not
seek relief from the company.  However, the Company has entered
into indemnification agreements in the ordinary course of
business with certain of the defendant officers and directors
and may be obligated throughout the pendency of these actions to
advance payment of legal fees and costs incurred by the
defendants pursuant to the Company's obligations under the
indemnification agreements and/or applicable Delaware law.

Based on the stage of the litigation, it is not possible to
estimate the amount or range of possible loss that might result
from an adverse judgment or a settlement of these matters.


I2 TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit in N.D. TX
----------------------------------------------------------------
I2 Technologies, Inc. faces a purported shareholder derivative
lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas (Dallas Division), along with its
current Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and
directors.  

The suit claims that the Company's Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer violated section 304 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2003 and seeks to recover from them bonuses and
equity-based compensation, and profits realized from sales of
securities of the company.  The suit also names the Company's
current directors for failing to seek recovery of the
aforementioned bonuses, equity-based compensation and trading
profits.

As stated, the complaint is derivative in nature and does not
seek relief from the company.  However, the Company has entered
into indemnification agreements in the ordinary course of
business with its Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial
Officer and directors and it may be obligated throughout the
pendency of this action to advance payment of legal fees and
costs incurred by the defendants pursuant to its obligations
under the indemnification agreements and/or applicable Delaware
law.

Based on the stage of the litigation, it is not possible to
estimate the amount or range of possible loss that might result
from an adverse judgment or a settlement of this matter.


I2 TECHNOLOGIES: Plaintiffs Appeal Dismissal of Derivative Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs appealed the dismissal of the shareholder derivative
lawsuit filed against I2 Technologies, Inc. and certain of its
officers and directors in the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division.

The suit claims that certain of the Company's officers and
directors breached their fiduciary duties to the company and its
stockholders by selling shares of our common stock while in
possession of material adverse non-public information regarding
our business and prospects, and disseminating inaccurate
information regarding the Company's business and prospects to
the market and/or failing to correct such inaccurate
information.

As stated, the complaint is derivative in nature and does not
seek relief from the Company.  However, the Company has entered
into indemnification agreements in the ordinary course of
business with certain of the defendant officers and directors
and may be obligated throughout the pendency of this action to
advance payment of legal fees and costs incurred by the
defendants pursuant to the Company's obligations under the
indemnification agreements and/or applicable Delaware law.

The Company filed a motion to dismiss the action on February 19,
2002 and the court later granted the motion.  Plaintiffs have
appealed the decision.  Based on the stage of the litigation, it
is not possible to estimate the amount or range of possible loss
that might result from an adverse judgment or a settlement of
this matter.


IDAHO: Agriculture Director Says No Alternative to Field-Burning
----------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho Department of Agriculture Director Patrick Takasugi says
there's no economically viable alternative to field burning - an
announcement that clears the way of thousands of grass fields to
be burned this year, kxly.com reports.  

The department's decision was required under a new state law
that protects farmers from litigation as long as they follow
state regulations such as burning only on days when regulators
say wind conditions are favorable.  Mr. Takasugi reviewed 48
documents before making the decision.

Seattle Attorney Steve Berman, who represents north Idaho
residents in a class action lawsuit against growers, told
kxly.com thousands of area residents could suffer irreparable
injury if the practice continues.


L90 INC.: Agrees To Settle For $5M Securities Lawsuit in C.D. CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
L90, Inc. reached an agreement in principle with plaintiff in
the consolidated securities class action filed against it and
certain of its former officers and directors in the United
States District Court for the Central District of California.

Several suits were filed following the announcement of the
Securities and Exchange Commission investigation and the
internal investigation by the Audit Committee of the Board of
Directors.  These suits were later consolidated.

The suit alleges that during 2000 and 2001 the Company, and the
other named defendants, made false or misleading statements of
material fact about the Company's financial statements,
including its revenue, revenue recognition policies, business
operations and prospects for the years 2000, 2001 and beyond.  
The complaints seek an unspecified amount of damages on behalf
of persons who purchased the Company's common stock during the
purported class period.

On March 18, 2003 the court granted the Company's motion to
dismiss the consolidated lawsuit for failure to state a claim
upon which any relief may be granted and the consolidated class
action lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice.  Because the
lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice, plaintiffs have an
opportunity to amend the complaint against the defendants.

The Company has reached an agreement in principle with the lead
plaintiff to settle the class action for approximately $5.0
million.  Final terms of the settlement are still under
negotiation and are subject to certain terms and conditions,
including court approval.


L90 INC.: Plaintiffs Ask CA Court To Allow Appeal of Dismissal
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in a securities class action initially filed against
Homestore.com, Inc. asked the United States District Court for
the Central District of California for permission to file an
interlocutory appeal of L90, Inc.'s dismissal as a defendant in
the suit.

The complaint generally alleges that L90 knowingly participated
in Homestore's scheme to defraud the investing public by
entering into improper transactions with Homestore in the second
and third quarters of 2001.  The complaints seek an unspecified
amount of damages on behalf of persons who purchased
Homestore.com's common stock during the purported class period.  
In March 2003, the lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice with
respect to the Company and it was not required to pay any
damages.  

On April 14, 2003, the lead plaintiff in the case filed a motion
for certification to gain the court's permission to pursue an
interlocutory appeal of the court's dismissal of the claims
against the Company.  The Company intends to oppose the motion
for certification of the interlocutory appeal.


L90 INC.: Reaches Settlement For CA Shareholder Derivative Suits
----------------------------------------------------------------
L90 Inc. reached a settlement agreement for two derivative
lawsuits filed against it (as a nominal defendant) and certain
of the Company's current and former officers and directors in
the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
Los Angeles.

The derivative complaints allege that certain of the Company's
current and former officers and directors breached their
fiduciary duties to the Company, engaged in abuses of their
control of the Company, wasted corporate assets, and grossly
mismanaged the Company.  The plaintiffs sought unspecified
damages on the Company's behalf from each of the defendants.

In April 2003, the Company settled these derivative actions for
$775,000 in attorneys' fees and the Company's agreement to adopt
certain corporate therapeutic actions.  The Company has received
insurance proceeds sufficient to satisfy the $775,000 to be paid
by it in settlement of the derivative suits.


SILICON LABORATORIES: Plaintiffs Push MOU To Settle Stock Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs proposed a memorandum of understanding to settle a
consolidated securities class action filed against Silicon
Laboratories, Inc., four officers individually and the three
investment banking firms who served as representatives of the
underwriters in connection with the Company's initial public
offering of common stock which became effective on March 23,
2000.

The suit alleges that the registration statement and prospectus
for the Company's initial public offering did not disclose that
the underwriters solicited and received additional, excessive
and undisclosed commissions from certain investors, and the
underwriters had agreed to allocate shares of the offering in
exchange for a commitment from the customers to purchase
additional shares in the aftermarket at pre-determined higher
prices.  The action seeks damages in an unspecified amount and
is being coordinated with approximately 300 other nearly
identical actions filed against other companies.

On July 15, 2002, the Company moved to dismiss all claims
against it and the individual defendants.  A court order dated
October 9, 2002 dismissed without prejudice numerous individual
defendants, including the four officers of the Company who had
been named individually.

On February 19, 2003, the court denied the motion to dismiss the
complaint against the Company.  The plaintiff class has proposed
a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and related agreements which
set forth the terms of a proposed settlement between the
plaintiff class and the Company and the other approximately 300
defendants.

It is anticipated that any potential financial obligation of the
Company to plaintiffs due pursuant to the terms of the MOU and
related agreements would be covered by existing insurance.  
Therefore, the Company does not expect that the proposed
settlement would involve any payment by the Company.

The MOU and related agreements are subject to a number of
contingencies, including the approval of the MOU by a sufficient
number of the other approximately 300 defendants, the
negotiation of a final settlement agreement, and approval of the
settlement by the court.

The Company cannot be certain as to whether or when a settlement
will occur or be finalized and is unable at this time to
determine whether the outcome of the litigation will have a
material impact on its results of operations or financial
condition in any future period.


SUNOCO INC.: Judge Grants Certification To Civil Rights Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
US District Judge Clifford Scott Green has approved class action
status for a civil rights lawsuit filed against Sunoco Inc. by
black professionals who say they were unfairly denied
promotions, the Associated Press Newswires reports.

Judge Green said the plaintiffs' analysis of Sunoco's employment
statistics is enough to certify the class, which can include
employees dating back to January 1, 1996.

"This is a classic glass-ceiling case," said Martin J. D'Urso,
who is among the lawyers representing DeWayne Ketchum and five
other current and former employees who had initially filed the
lawsuit.

Sunoco spokesman Gerald Davis said company officials will meet
with lawyers to decide how to respond to the ruling.  The
company could appeal to the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals.


TRILLIUM BANQUET: Faces Suit For Students Infected With E. Coli
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Trillium Banquet Hall and Convention Centre in Ontario,
Canada faces a possible multi-million dollar class action filed
by nearly 90 students who contracted an E. coli infection there
last month, the Mississauga News reports.

90 students and their families from E.C. Drury High School fell
ill from eating food at the banquet hall during their prom on
June 25.  The suit will be brought on behalf of Jennifer
O'Neill, one of the students who suffered E. coli poisoning.

Lawyer for the plaintiffs Sharon Strosberg told News Friday Ms.
O'Neill suffered cramps and bloody diarrhea.  She hasn't gone
back to work since falling ill, as she works in the deli
department at Loblaws.  She has been ordered to stay home as
part of a public health order that anyone who became sick with
E. coli and works in the food service or day care industries not
return to work until they've been cleared to do so.

Ms. Strosberg told The News Friday the suit could be filed in an
Ontario Superior Court of Justice as early as Monday.  

"(My clients) realize that a wrong has been done to them and
they deserve to be compensated for that," she said.

"I think the reason (we're going forward with the lawsuit) is
obvious, but I don't want to talk about it much," Bill O'Neill,
Jennifer's father, told News Friday.  "(Jennifer) is doing
better now, but she is still not 100 per cent."

Peel health officials traced the source of the infection to the
meal served at the banquet hall after a two-week investigation.  
Peel's public health department has also reported five confirmed
cases of E. coli poisoning in people who attended three other
events at the Trillium Banquet Hall around the same time.

Helen Vivra, part owner of the hall, told the Mississauga News
she didn't "know anything about a lawsuit."  The hall remains
open for business, but public health officials have ordered that
food be prepared off-site.


UNITED STATES: CA Group Speaks Out Against Class Action Abuse
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse (CALA) groups throughout
California convened outside the national convention of the
Association of Trial Lawyers of America in San Francisco to
protest and raise public awareness about the impact frivolous
litigation and unfounded class action lawsuits have had on
America's healthcare delivery system.

The protest is part of a national campaign, "Lawsuit Abuse Makes
Us Sick," which is designed to educate consumers about how
frivolous and excessive healthcare litigation is raising costs
for prescription drugs, health coverage and doctor visits, while
also jeopardizing access to medical products and treatments.

"We're here today to tell the story of people like Titus
Simonini," said Maryann Maloney, executive director of Orange
County Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse.  "Titus has
hydrocephalus, and needs a silicon brain shunt to survive.  But
because of junk science lawsuits against silicon manufacturers,
fewer companies are willing to manufacture the shunts that keep
him alive.  Now, Titus and his mother are very concerned about
the future."

Titus' problem is not unique, Ms. Maloney adds.  According to a
study by New York-based Arnoff Associates, each year over 7.5
million lives in America are either saved by or improved through
implantable medical devices or products like pacemakers and
stents.  Yet, due to the threat of liability, 75% of suppliers
of biomaterials used to make medical implants banned sales to US
manufacturers.  Although the Biomaterials Assurance Assistance
Act of 2000 aimed to remedy this by providing important legal
protections to suppliers in liability lawsuits, numerous medical
device producers choose to remain overseas.
    
"Litigation is also a major threat to our access to care," Ms.
Maloney says.  "It's an accepted fact that litigation raises
costs.  When litigation forces healthcare costs to rise, the
natural result is an increase in the cost of coverage.  
Unfortunately as the cost of coverage rises, so do the number of
uninsured."

According to a study published in the Journal of Health
Economics, every ten percent increase in the cost of insurance
creates a three to four percent decrease in the number of people
who choose to purchase coverage.

"You don't have to be an economist to know that when people
can't afford coverage, they can't afford care.  When they can't
get care, they just get sicker," Ms. Maloney said.  "Already
more than 40 million Americans have no health coverage, and that
will only get worse if healthcare litigation is not brought
under control."

Ms. Maloney says that form of control could come from
legislative reforms that would remove the "jackpot mentality"
from the civil justice system and ensure greater predictability,
fairness and balance.  According to a recent study by the US
Department of Health and Human Services, simply limiting
"unreasonable" jury awards could cut health care costs by five
to nine percent, saving $70 - $126 billion each year and
allowing an additional 2.4 - 4.3 million Americans to obtain
medical insurance.

"America is facing a health care crisis," Ms. Maloney said.  
"Lawsuit abuse threatens our healthcare system and jeopardizes
our ability to access what should be the finest health care in
the world.  Our legal system is in desperate need of fundamental
reform."

For more details, contact Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse - Ms.
Maryann Maloney by Phone: 714/259-8400


UTAH: Legislature Cuts Foster-Care Review Board's Budget In Half
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Utah state program that reviews individual foster care cases
had its budget cut in half by Utah's Legislature and now expects
to be able to review only half the cases, the Associated Press
Newswires reports.  

Some legislators believe the Foster Care Citizens Review Board
is an unnecessary duplication of effort because the courts and
the state's Division of Child and Family Services (DCFS) already
conduct foster care reviews.

A class action filed a decade ago claimed the state was not
properly caring for children in state custody and was actually
endangering them.  The outcome of the class action was that Utah
remains under federal court oversight, and some improvements
have been made.  Review board members say they have been an
integral part of those improvements, and efforts to drop the
board will erode the progress that has been made.

Board director Patricia Worthington said in response to
legislators' charge that the board is an "unnecessary
duplication" that, "The review board does not overlap.  It deals
directly with the children and foster parents involved and
(discovers) how things are working on the front line."  There
are about 2,000 children in state custody at any given time in
Utah.  The board has had a goal of reviewing every child's
case every year.

DCFS Director Richard Anderson said he is convinced the citizens
review board has made a difference.  Mr. Anderson said further
efforts to cut it would harm one of the most effective volunteer
organizations in the state.


WOODWARD GOVERNOR: Employees File Race Discrimination Suit in IL
----------------------------------------------------------------
Woodward Governor faces a racial discrimination class action
filed by sixteen former and current employees in the United
States District Court in Rockford, Illinois, the Rockford
Register Star reports.

The $1 million suit alleges the Company does not pay or promote
minorities as much as their white counterparts.  The suit
specifically claims that the Company had a racially hostile work
environment.  The suit also says supervisors spoke references to
derogatory racial comments in the workplace, including:

     (1) the term "African engineering," which referred to flaws
         made in the design process;

     (2) a comment that a dark-skinned employee "forgot to wash
         his face in the morning;"

     (3) the statement, "If your people continue like this,
         they'll be back in slavery."

"One of the red flags is how the company is doing at hiring and
promoting minorities," lawyer Jennifer Soule, who represents the
one Asian, one Hispanic and 14 black workers in the class told
the Rockford Register Star.

In a statement, the Company acknowledged the suit and said it
has "fully met our obligations under the law."  "Because of the
nature of these proceedings, it is not appropriate for us to
comment further at this time concerning the details of the
charges or our specific defenses to them," the statement read.  
"Woodward is committed to equal opportunity.  We look forward to
presenting our position before both the EEOC and the U.S.
District Court."

"I think this case is a strong one," Ms. Soule told the Star.  
"I'm not comfortable comparing it to other cases, but we think
it has merit."


                   New Securities Fraud Cases


ADMINISTAFF INC.: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in S.D. TX
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas, Houston Division, on behalf of purchasers of
Administaff, Inc. (NYSE: ASF) publicly traded securities during
the period between April 3, 2001 to July 31, 2002, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market between April 3, 2001 and July
31, 2002, thereby artificially inflating the price of
Administaff securities.

The complaint alleges that these statements were materially
false and misleading because they failed to disclose and
misrepresented the following adverse facts, among others:

     (1) that Administaff had inadequate and deficient pricing
         and billing systems and was incorrectly calibrating
         pricing for clients that experienced declines in
         average payroll cost per worksite employee;

     (2) that Administaff was incorrectly matching the price and
         cost for health insurance on new and renewing client
         contracts; and

     (3) that, in violation of Generally Accepted Accounting
         Practices and in order to retain its coveted place on
         the Fortune 500 listing, Administaff was improperly
         recognizing revenue by failing to net Administaff's
         worksite employee payroll costs against revenues.

On August 1, 2002, before the open of trading, Administaff
shocked the investing public when it released its financial and
operational results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2002,
reporting "a net loss and diluted net loss per share of $3.2
million and $0.11" as compared to Thomson Financial/First Call
estimates of $0.04 earnings per share.  Market reaction was
swift and negative, with Administaff stock falling from a close
of $7.50 on July 31, 2002 to a close of $4.20 on August 1, 2002,
or a single-day decline of 44% in heavy trading.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


CENTRAL PARKING: Marc Henzel Files Securities Lawsuit in M.D. TN
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Tennessee, Nashville Division, on behalf of all
purchasers of the common stock of Central Parking Corporation
(NYSE: CPC) from November 4, 2002 through February 13, 2003,
inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market between November 4, 2002 and
February 13, 2003, thereby artificially inflating the price of
Central Parking common stock.

The complaint alleges that these statements were materially
false and misleading because they failed to disclose and
misrepresented the following adverse facts, among others:

     (1) that the Company's internal controls were inadequate to
         record and document the Company's financial results;

     (2) that the Company was materially understating its bad
         debt reserve, thereby overstating its earnings;

     (3) that the Company was materially understating its
         accounts payable, thereby overstating its financial
         condition; and

     (4) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial
         statements were not prepared in accordance with
         Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and,
         therefore, were materially false and misleading.

On February 14, 2003, Central Parking shocked the market when it
announced that it would be taking a charge to increase its bad
debt reserve and that it would be taking a charge to increase
its accounts payables.  In response to this announcement, the
price of Central Parking common stock dropped from $15.82 on
February 13, 2003 to a close of $12.31 on February 14, 2003, or
a single-day decline of more than 22%, on more than seven times
normal trading volume.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


CROMPTON CORPORATION: Brodsky & Smith Lodges CA Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Brodsky & Smith, LLC initiated a securities class action on
behalf of shareholders who purchased the common stock and other
securities of Crompton Corporation (NYSE:CK), including those
former Crompton & Knowles and Witco shareholders who exchanged
their shares of stock for CK Witco stock pursuant to the merger
during the period between October 26, 1998 and October 8, 2002
inclusive.

The class action lawsuit was filed against the Company and
certain of its current and/or former officers and/or directors
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated federal
securities laws by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market during the Class Period,
thereby artificially inflating the price of Crompton securities.  
Specifically, while shares of Crompton traded at the inflated
prices, the Company was able to refinance its debt and
consummate a major acquisition using its inflated securities as
currency.

For more details, contact Marc L. Ackerman or Evan J. Smith by
Mail: Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, by
Phone: 877-LEGAL-90 or by E-mail: clients@brodsky-smith.com


CROMPTON CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Lodges Securities Suit in CA
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California on behalf of purchasers of Crompton
Corporation (NYSE: CK) publicly traded securities, including
former Crompton & Knowles and Witco shareholders who exchanged
their shares of stock for CK Witco stock pursuant to the merger
during the period between October 26, 1998 and October 8, 2002).

The complaint charges Crompton and certain of its officers and
directors with violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  Crompton manufactures and
markets a wide variety of polymer and specialty products.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
caused Crompton's shares to trade at artificially inflated
levels through the issuance of false and misleading financial
statements by:

     (1) agreeing to charge prices at certain levels and
         otherwise to fix, increase, maintain or stabilize
         prices of rubber chemicals sold in the United States;

     (2) selling rubber chemicals at the agreed upon prices; and

     (3) inflating their profits via the above acts.

As a result, the Company's shares traded at inflated prices
enabling the Company to refinance its debt and consummate a
major acquisition using its inflated securities as currency.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


CROMPTON CORPORATION: Charles Piven Lodges Securities Suit in CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Charles J. Piven, P.A. initiated a securities class action on
behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted, exchanged or
otherwise acquired Crompton Corporation (NYSE:CK) publicly
traded securities, including former Crompton & Knowles and Witco
shareholders who exchanged their shares of stock for CK Witco
stock pursuant to the merger during the period between October
26, 1998 and October 8, 2002.

The case is pending in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California against Crompton Corporation and
certain of its current and/or former officers and/or directors.  
The action charges that defendants violated federal securities
laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the market throughout the class period which
statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market
price of the Company's securities.

For more details, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World
Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525,
Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail:
hoffman@pivenlaw.com


GUIDANT CORPORATION: Marc Henzel Launches Securities Suit in IN
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Marc S. Henzel initiated a securities class
action in the United States District Court for the District of
Indiana on behalf of all persons who purchased or acquired
Guidant Corporation (NYSE: GDT) securities between August 17,
2001 and June 12, 2003, inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by issuing a series of material
misrepresentations to the market between August 17, 2001 and
June 12, 2003, thereby artificially inflating the price of
Guidant securities.

The complaint alleges that the Company's ANCURE ENDOGRAFT System
(used to prevent an aneurysm in the heart's main artery from
rupturing) was not safe and that it was the cause of over 2,600
incidents that included 12 deaths; the Company failed to notify
the FDA regarding the over 2,600 incidents that included 12
deaths resulting from the defective ANCURE ENDOGRAFT System; and
the Company engaged in fraudulent sales of the ANCURE ENDOGRAFT
System.

On June 12, 2003, the Company agreed to plead guilty to federal
charges and to pay $92.4 million for misleading regulators about
12 deaths and serious injuries linked to the ANCURE ENDOGRAFT
System.

For more details, contact Marc S. Henzel by Mail: 273 Montgomery
Ave., Suite 202, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 by Phone: 610-660-8000 or
888-643-6735 by Fax: 610-660-8080 or by E-Mail:
mhenzel182@aol.com       


LABORATORY CORPORATION: Charles Piven Files Stock Lawsuit in NC
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices Of Charles J. Piven, PA initiated a securities
class action on behalf of shareholders who purchased, converted,
exchanged or otherwise acquired the common stock of Laboratory
Corporation of America Holdings (NYSE:LH) between February 13,
2002 and October 3, 2002, inclusive.  The case is pending in the
United States District Court for the Middle District of North
Carolina against the Company and certain of its executive
officers.

The action charges that defendants violated federal securities
laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading
statements to the market throughout the class period which
statements had the effect of artificially inflating the market
price of the Company's securities.

For more details, contact Charles J. Piven by Mail: The World
Trade Center-Baltimore, 401 East Pratt Street, Suite 2525,
Baltimore, Maryland 21202, by Phone: 410-986-0036 or by E-mail:
hoffman@pivenlaw.com


READ-RITE CORPORATION: Wechsler Harwood Files CA Securities Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wechsler Harwood LLP initiated a securities class action against
Alan S. Lowe and Andrew C. Holcomb, respectively the Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Read-Rite
Corporation (NasdaqNM:RDRTQ) in the United States District Court
for the Northern District California on behalf of all persons or
entities who purchased Read-Rite stock between October 30, 2001
and June 17, 2003 inclusive.

The complaint alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission
by issuing a series of material misrepresentations about the
financial condition of Read-Rite in order to materially inflate
the stock price, obtain a stream of capital to keep the Company
operational, and maintain the lucrative salaries received by
defendants.

The complaint alleges that the defendants released financial
statements that were in violation of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (GAAP).  On June 17, 2003, Read-Rite
stunned the market when it disclosed that it would seek
bankruptcy protection under Chapter 7.

For more details, contact Craig Lowther by Mail: 488 Madison
Avenue, 8th Floor, New York, New York 10022 by Phone:
(877) 935-7400 x-283 or by E-mail: clowther@whesq.com


SINGING MACHINE: Vianale & Vianale Lodges Securities Suit in FL
---------------------------------------------------------------
Vianale & Vianale LLP filed a securities class action lawsuit on
behalf of investors who purchased the securities of The Singing
Machine Company, Inc. (AMEX:SMD) during the class period
February 14, 2001 and June 27, 2003 in the United States
District Court for Southern District of Florida.

The lawsuit alleges that defendants artificially inflated the
price of The Singing Machine's securities during the class
period by issuing materially false and misleading financial
statements.  Specifically, the lawsuit alleges defendants
repeatedly issued financial statements that did not account for
the Company's probable liability for Hong Kong income taxes.  
Defendants, however, had no basis to claim they would receive
any tax exemption from Hong Kong authorities, and should have
appropriately reserved for the tax payments.

On June 27, 2003, the Company revealed that it would seek an
extension to file its Annual Report on Form 10-K for fiscal 2003
and that it would restate its fiscal 2002 and possibly 2001
financial statements.  The restatement was prompted by the
Company's admission of a need to increase an accrual for income
taxes that may be payable to Hong Kong authorities.  The stock
price dropped 33% on the news.  The Company's auditor is also
named as a defendant in the suit.

For more details, contact Kenneth J. Vianale or Julie Prag
Vianale by Mail: 5355 Town Center Road, Suite 801, Boca Raton,
Florida 33486 by Phone: 1-888-657-9960 or 561-391-4900 or by E-
mail: info@vianalelaw.com


STOCKWALK INC.: Zimmerman Reed Launches Securities Lawsuit in MN
----------------------------------------------------------------
Zimmerman Reed PLLP initiated a securities class action in the
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on
behalf of persons who purchased the common stock of Stockwalk on
the open market from May 8, 2001 through September 25, 2001.  At
the time, the stock was trading on the Nasdaq Exchange under the
symbol STOK.  It has now been de-listed.

The shareholder bringing the lawsuit is a resident of Faribault,
Minnesota who purchased Stockwalk securities during the class
period on the open market.  The complaint alleges that certain
former officers of Stockwalk issued materially false statements
and omitted material facts concerning Stockwalk's financial
condition during the class period.

Generally, defendants represented that Stockwalk's internal
controls were sufficiently adequate to permit the issuance of a
report on the company's financials statements for the period
ending March 31, 2001, that the company was not in violation of
certain net capital requirements and that the company was not at
risk with respect to its stock lending activities.

The complaint alleges that purchasers of Stockwalk securities
were unaware that a significant activity that the company was
engaged in was stock lending.  The complaint also asserts that
Defendant Ernst & Young lacked independence in conducting its
auditing and accounting activities, was negligent in performing
its services and should have objected to the issuance in June
and July 2001, of its prior, unqualified opinion on the March
31, 2001 financial statements.

For more details, contact Robert C. Moilanen or Carolyn G.
Anderson by Phone: 800-755-0098 or 612-341-0400


                        *********

A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each
Wednesday's edition of the Class Action Reporter. Submissions
via e-mail to carconf@beard.com are encouraged.

Each Friday's edition of the CAR includes a section featuring
news on asbestos-related litigation and profiles of target
asbestos defendants that, according to independent researches,
collectively face billions of dollars in asbestos-related
liabilities.  The Asbestos Defendant Profiles is backed by an
online database created to respond to custom searches. Go to
http://litigationdatasource.com/asbestos_defendant_profiles.html

                        *********


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Trenton, New Jersey, and
Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C.  Enid Sterling, Aurora
Fatima Antonio and Lyndsey Resnick, Editors.

Copyright 2003.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1525-2272.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without
prior written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed
to be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via
e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each.  For subscription information, contact Christopher
Beard at 240/629-3300.

                  * * *  End of Transmission  * * *